Rupert Spira disagrees with Tdarcos.
Moderators: Ice Cream Jonsey, joltcountry
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
Rupert Spira disagrees with Tdarcos.
Regarding Tdarcos' (and others') insistence that "he" is somewhere behind his eyes.
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
Am I a hero? I really can't say. But, yes.
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
- Flack
- Posts: 9057
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:02 pm
- Location: Oklahoma
- Contact:
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
- Tdarcos
- Posts: 9529
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 9:25 am
- Location: Arlington, Virginia
- Contact:
He's a whackjob. There are so many things wrong with what Rupert Spira said I don't know where to begin. This is mostly new age mysticism.
First, I'll talk about the teenager asked what they're watching example. if you asked some teenager looking at a TV set "what are you looking at?" or "what are you watching?" I seriously believe they are going to respond the same way, by identifying the program. And if they turn off the TV and were asked either question, would answer "nothing." This guy goes out on a limb and proceeds to say that some (unidentified) percentage if asked "what are you looking at" when the TV is turned off are a bit smarter and that they'd say "the screen." I seriously doubt even 1 in 100,000 would answer the question literally.
I have stated that where I am (in my head) is "approximately" the back of my eyes because I cannot provide a better, more precise location. He proceeds to throw this out with an example of someone named Mark in Garrison dreaming they are someone else, named John, looking at the streets of New York, closing his eyes, and no longer seeing, presuming he is there in New York and his consciousness is behind his eyes, standing in New York, while he's actually in Garrison. Only thing is, Spira does not realize he's referring to a construct invented by his brain, and not to actual conditions.
You could see or experience anything your mind can conjure up in a dream and confusing the experience of a dream with reality is not a valid comparison.
In short, he gives no reason to argue otherwise and no evidence or even conjecture.
I can argue a better counterargument to my own opinion right now and he didn't even try. It is possible because the brain has no sensory cells - the brain cannot feel pain, for example - the actual location of the consciousness might be someplace else and it is the connection point to the senses that we perceive as the location of the consciousness rather than the actual location, which might be in the frontal lobes, or down in the back.
A real-life example would be a cell phone that has contact with one tower but does not have GPS. All the phone "knows" is that it is a certain distance away, plus or minus one mile, and that it sees the tower as 4 miles away. This means you make a circle 4 miles around a tower and make the circle 1 mile thick. Math tells us the area of the diameter of a circle is PI*R**2 (Pi x Radius raised to the second power.) For a 4 mile circle one mile wide, that's an area of 52 square miles that the phone can be located in.
I think what he is trying to say without explicitly saying it, is that not all of our consciousness is contained within our body. Which he provides no evidence or even conjecture for.
First, I'll talk about the teenager asked what they're watching example. if you asked some teenager looking at a TV set "what are you looking at?" or "what are you watching?" I seriously believe they are going to respond the same way, by identifying the program. And if they turn off the TV and were asked either question, would answer "nothing." This guy goes out on a limb and proceeds to say that some (unidentified) percentage if asked "what are you looking at" when the TV is turned off are a bit smarter and that they'd say "the screen." I seriously doubt even 1 in 100,000 would answer the question literally.
I have stated that where I am (in my head) is "approximately" the back of my eyes because I cannot provide a better, more precise location. He proceeds to throw this out with an example of someone named Mark in Garrison dreaming they are someone else, named John, looking at the streets of New York, closing his eyes, and no longer seeing, presuming he is there in New York and his consciousness is behind his eyes, standing in New York, while he's actually in Garrison. Only thing is, Spira does not realize he's referring to a construct invented by his brain, and not to actual conditions.
You could see or experience anything your mind can conjure up in a dream and confusing the experience of a dream with reality is not a valid comparison.
In short, he gives no reason to argue otherwise and no evidence or even conjecture.
I can argue a better counterargument to my own opinion right now and he didn't even try. It is possible because the brain has no sensory cells - the brain cannot feel pain, for example - the actual location of the consciousness might be someplace else and it is the connection point to the senses that we perceive as the location of the consciousness rather than the actual location, which might be in the frontal lobes, or down in the back.
A real-life example would be a cell phone that has contact with one tower but does not have GPS. All the phone "knows" is that it is a certain distance away, plus or minus one mile, and that it sees the tower as 4 miles away. This means you make a circle 4 miles around a tower and make the circle 1 mile thick. Math tells us the area of the diameter of a circle is PI*R**2 (Pi x Radius raised to the second power.) For a 4 mile circle one mile wide, that's an area of 52 square miles that the phone can be located in.
I think what he is trying to say without explicitly saying it, is that not all of our consciousness is contained within our body. Which he provides no evidence or even conjecture for.
"Baby, I was afraid before
I'm not afraid, any more."
- Belinda Carlisle, Heaven Is A Place On Earth
I'm not afraid, any more."
- Belinda Carlisle, Heaven Is A Place On Earth
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
- pinback
- Posts: 17849
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
- Contact:
I should point out one thing, though:
Both of these things were metaphors, analogies to help convey the message he was intending to convey. The fact that you took them literally and responded as such just proves that you are a goddamn TREASURE to this BBS, and we are all happy you are here.Tdarcos wrote:First, I'll talk about the teenager asked what they're watching example. if you asked some teenager looking at a TV set "what are you looking at?" or "what are you watching?" I seriously believe they are going to respond the same way, by identifying the program. And if they turn off the TV and were asked either question, would answer "nothing." This guy goes out on a limb and proceeds to say that some (unidentified) percentage if asked "what are you looking at" when the TV is turned off are a bit smarter and that they'd say "the screen." I seriously doubt even 1 in 100,000 would answer the question literally.
I have stated that where I am (in my head) is "approximately" the back of my eyes because I cannot provide a better, more precise location. He proceeds to throw this out with an example of someone named Mark in Garrison dreaming they are someone else, named John, looking at the streets of New York, closing his eyes, and no longer seeing, presuming he is there in New York and his consciousness is behind his eyes, standing in New York, while he's actually in Garrison. Only thing is, Spira does not realize he's referring to a construct invented by his brain, and not to actual conditions.
You could see or experience anything your mind can conjure up in a dream and confusing the experience of a dream with reality is not a valid comparison.
Am I a hero? I really can't say. But, yes.